North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical


  • From: Mark Mentovai
  • Date: Sun Nov 12 21:21:48 2000

Sean Donelan wrote:
>On Sun, 12 November 2000, "Mark Mentovai" wrote:
>> The drive to "slam" is pushed by dollars.  I can't think of any situation in
>> which someone might profit from announcing address space without
>> authorization.  The problems facing the Internet are mostly due to laziness
>> and lack of clue, enabled by an experimental infrastructure designed to
>> support neither of these things.  IP assumes non-hostile, non-lazy, and
>> non-clueless nodes.
>Sure it is.  When I asked why did providers announced addresses improperly,
>I've been told by both Sprint and UUNET engineers "because they paid us and
>you don't."

But these problems were corrected, no?  The point I'm trying to make is that
these operators don't make any additional profits by doing the wrong thing
and then fixing it (as they did, unless someone can point to instances in
which brokenness wasn't fixed after it was brought to their attention) than
by doing the right thing from the start (verifying announcements, etc.)  
The way I see it, aside from the extra time and "hassle" involved in doing
it right, doing it wrong and doing it right are the same in the bookkeeper's

If Sprint and UU KNOWINGLY make or pass bad advertisements, then there's no
hope for making progress within the community.  I really hope that this is
not the case.